Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 91, Issue , 2015, Pages 222-235

  van de Kaa, Geerten ^a   de Vries, Henk J ^b  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Format battles; Formats; Technology selection

Indexed keywords

TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

FORMAT BATTLES; FORMATS; INTERFACE FORMATS; MULTICHANNEL SOUNDS; TECHNOLOGY FIELDS; TECHNOLOGY SELECTION; WIRED CONNECTIVITY; WIRELESS CONNECTIVITIES;

INNOVATION;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY; PREDICTION; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

EID: 84920151151     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.02.019     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Shapiro C., Varian H.R. The art of standards wars. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1999, 41(2):8-32.
2. David P.A. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am. Econ. Rev. 1985, 75(2):332-337.
3. Cusumano M.A., Mylonadis Y., Rosenbloom R.S. Strategic maneuvering and mass-market dynamics: the triumph of VHS over Beta. Bus. Hist. Rev. 1992, 66(1):51-94.
4. Rosenbloom R.S., Cusumano M.A. Technological pioneering and competitive advantage: the birth of the VCR industry. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1987, 29(4):51-76.
5. Suarez F.F. Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework. Res. Policy 2004, 33(2):271-286.
6. Schilling M.A. Technological lockout: an integrative model of the economic and strategic factors driving technology success and failure. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1998, 23(2):267-284.
7. Lee J., O'Neal D.E., Pruett M.W., Thoams H. Planning for dominance: a strategic perspective on the emergence of a dominant design. R&D Manag. 1995, 25(1):3-15.
8. Schilling M.A. Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: the impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45(2):387-398. (alities, Acad. Manag. J. 45 (2), 2002, 387-398.).
9. Van de Kaa G., Van den Ende J., De Vries H.J., Van Heck E. Factors for winning interface format battles: a review and synthesis of the literature. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2011, 78:1397-1411.
10. Eisenhardt K.M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14(4):532-550.
11. Yin R.K. Case Study Research, Design and Methods 2009, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
12. Anderson P., Tushman M.L. Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of technological change. Admin. Sci. Q. 1990, 35(4):604-633.
13. Farrell J., Saloner G. Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. RAND J. Econ. 1985, 16(1):70-83.
14. Katz M.L., Shapiro C. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Am. Econ. Rev. 1985, 75(3):424-440.
15. Gallaugher J.M., Wang Y.-M. Understanding network effects in software markets: evidence from web server pricing. MIS Q. 2002, 26(4):303-327.
16. Gallagher S.R., Park S.H. Innovation and competition in standard-based industries: a historical analysis of the U.S. home video game market. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2002, 49(1):67-82.
17. Schilling M.A. Technological leapfrogging: lessons from the U.S. video game console industry. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2003, 45(3):6-32.
18. Gallagher S.R. The battle of the blue laser DVDs: the significance of corporate strategy in standards battles. Technovation 2012, 32(2):90-98.
19. David P.A., Greenstein S. The economics of compatibility standards: an introduction to recent research. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 1990, 1(1,2):3-41.
20. Arthur W.B. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ. J. 1989, 99(394):116-131.
21. Tushman M., Anderson P. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Q. 1986, 31(3):439-465.
22. Utterback J.M., Abernathy W.J. A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega Int. J. Manag. Sci. 1975, 3(6):639-656.
23. Abernathy W.J., Utterback J.M. Patterns of industrial innovation. Technol. Rev. 1978, 80(7):40-47.
24. Utterback J.M. Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation 1994, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
25. Sheremata W.A. Competing through innovation in network markets: strategies for challengers. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2004, 29(3):359-377.
26. McIntyre D.P., Subramaniam M. Strategy in network industries: a review and research agenda. J. Manag. 2009, 35(6):1494-1517.
27. Shapiro C., Varian H.R. Information Rules, a Strategic Guide to the Network Economy 1999, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
28. Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1984, 5(2):171-180.
29. Penrose E. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm 1959, Basil Blackwell, London.
30. Teece D.J. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy. Res. Policy 1986, 15(6):285-305.
31. Besen S.M., Farrell J. Choosing how to compete: strategies and tactics in standardization. J. Econ. Perspect. 1994, 8(2):117-131.
32. Dranove D., Gandal N. The DVD versus DIVX standard war: empirical evidence of network effects and preannouncement effects. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 2003, 12(3):363-386.
33. Farrell J., Saloner G. Installed base and compatibility: innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 76(5):940-955.
34. Hill C.W.L. Establishing a standard: competitive strategy and technological standards in winner-take-all industries. Acad. Manag. Exec. 1997, 11(2):7-25.
35. Schilling M.A. Winning the standards race: building installed base and the availability of complementary goods. Eur. Manag. J. 1999, 17(3):265-274.
36. Brynjolfsson E. Network externalities in microcomputer software: an econometric analysis of the spreadsheet market. Manag. Sci. 1996, 42(12):1627-1647.
37. Bekkers R., Duysters G., Verspagen B. Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM. Res. Policy 2002, 31(7):1141-1161.
38. Lee J., Lee J., Lee H. Exploration and exploitation in the presence of network externalities. Manag. Sci. 2003, 49(4):553-570.
39. Backhouse J., Hsu C., Leiser S. Circuits of power in creating de jure standards: shaping an international information systems security standard. MIS Q. 2006, 30:413-438. (Special Issue).
40. Greenstein S. Invisible hands and visible advisors: an economic interpretation of standardization. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1992, 43(8):538-549.
41. Farrell J., Shapiro C., Nelson R.R., Noll R.G. Standard setting in high-definition television, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics 1992, 1-93.
42. De Vries H.J. The classification of standards. Knowl. Organ. 1998, 25(3):79-89.
43. Miles M.B., Huberman M.A. Qualitative Data Analysis 1994, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
44. Van den Ende J., Van de Kaa G., Den Uyl S., De Vries H. The paradox of standard flexibility: the effects of co-evolution between standard and interorganizational network. Organ. Stud. 2012, 33(5-6):705-736.
45. Cohen P. FireWire headed for slow decline, says report (in:). http://www.macworld.com/article/1058617/firewire.html.
46. Lemstra W., Hayes V., Groenewegen J. The Innovation Journey of Wi-Fi: The Road To Global Success 2011, Cambrige University Press, Cambridge.
47. Negus K., Stephens A.P., Linsford P. HomeRF: wireless networking for the connected home. IEEE Pers. Commun. february 2000.
48. Jakobs K. Why then did the X.400 e-mail standard fail? Reasons and lessons to be learned. J. Inf. Technol. 2013, 28(1):63-73.
49. Arar Y. HomeRF to Speed Up: An FCC Ruling Clears the Way for 10-mbps HomeRF Wireless Networks, PC World, september 2000.
50. DECTweb What is DECT? some answers (in:). http://www.dectweb.com/Introduction/answers.htm.
51. Lansford J., Bahl P. The design and implementation of HomeRF: a radio frequency wireless networking standard for the connected home. Proc. IEEE 2000, 88(10):1661-1676.
52. Winstein K.J. MIT finishes three lawsuits, initiates one during summer. Technology 2002, 122(36):12.
53. Suarez F.F., Utterback J.M. Dominant designs and the survival of firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 1995, 16(6):415-430.
54. Eisenmann T.R. Managing proprietary and shared platforms. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2008, 50:31-53.
55. de Vries H.J., de Ruijter J.P.M., Argam N. Dominant design or multiple designs: the flash memory card case. Technol. Anal. Strateg. 2011, 23(3):249-262.
56. Riegman T., de Vries H.J. Establishing a Dynamic Model for Factors Favouring Multiple Designs. 10th Anniversary International Conference Standardization and Related Activities - - A Means of International and Balkan Collaboration, Sofia 2013.
57. Seo D. The significance of the role of government in standardization: the case of the wireless communications industry. J. Cases Inform. Technol. 2010, 12:63-73.
58. Willard G.E., Cooper A.C. Survivors of industry shake-outs: the case of the U.S. color television set industry. Strateg. Manag. J. 1985, 6(4):299-318.
59. Hornby A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English 2000, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.
60. Schumpeter J.A. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle 1934, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
61. De Vries H.J. Standardization, a Business Approach to the Role of National Standardization Organizations 1999, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London.
62. Dew N., Read S. The more we get together: coordinating network externality product introduction in the RFID industry. Technovation 2007, 27(10):569-581.
63. Lieberman M.B., Montgomery D.B. First mover advantages. Strateg. Manag. J. 1988, 9:41-58. (Special Issue: Strategy Content Research).
64. Webster E.o.M. Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2000, Merriam-Webster, Inc, Springfield, Massachusetts.
65. Keil T. De-facto standardization through alliances - - lessons from Bluetooth. Telecommun. Policy 2002, 26(3-4):205-213.
66. Gomes-Casseras B. Group versus group: how alliance networks compete. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1994, 72(4):62-74.
67. Brookey R.A. The format wars - - drawing the battle lines for the next DVD. Convergence 2007, 13(2).
68. Gallagher S. The complementary role of dominant designs and industry standards. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2007, 54(2):371-388.
69. Tripsas M. Unraveling the process of creative destruction: complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter Industry. Strateg. Manag. J. 1997, 18:S119-S142. (special issue).
70. Schmidt S.K., Werle R. Co-ordinating Technology. Studies in the International Standardization of Telecommunications 1998, MIT Press, Cambridge.
71. Jakobs K. Shaping user-side innovation through standardisation, the example of ICT. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2006, 73(1):27-40.
72. Leiponen A.E. Competing through cooperation: the organization of standard setting in wireless telecommunications. Manag. Sci. 2008, 54(11):1904-1919.
73. Suarez F.F., Lanzolla G. The half-truth of first-mover advantage. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2005, 83(4):121-127.
74. Smit F.C., Pistorius C.W.I. Implications of the dominant design in electronic initiation systems in the South African mining industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 1998, 59(3):255-274.
75. Reddy M.N. International standardization of technical products. Technovation 1990, 10(6):407-417.
76. Funk J.L. Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages. Res. Policy 2003, 32(8):1325-1341.
77. Funk J.L., Methe D.T. Market- and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication. Res. Policy 2001, 30(4):589-610.
78. Chiesa V., Manzini R., Toletti G. Standard-setting processes: evidence from two case studies. R&D Manag. 2002, 32(5):431-450.
79. De Vries H.J., Hendrikse G.W.J. The Dutch banking chipcard game - - understanding a battle between two standards. Int. Stud. Manag. Organ 2001, 31(1):106-125.
80. Langlois R.N., Robertson P.L. Networks and innovation in a modular system: lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries. Res. Policy 1992, 21(4):297-313.
81. Garud R., Jain S., Kumaraswamy A. Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: the case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45(1):196-214.
82. Christensen C.M., Rosenbloom R.S. Explaining the attacker''s advantage: technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Res. Policy 1995, 24(2):233-257.
83. Van de Kaa G., Rezaei J., Kamp L., De Winter A. Photovoltaic Technology Selection: A Fuzzy MCDM Approach 2014, 32:662-670.
84. Van de Kaa G., Van Heck H.W.G.M, De Vries H.J., Van den Ende J.C.M., Rezaei J. Supporting Decision-Making in Technology Standards Battles Based on a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process 2014, 61(2):336-348.